On 28.09.2016 23:39, Thomas Munro wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Keith Fiske <ke...@omniti.com> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 11:11 PM, Thomas Munro
<thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
Ok, here's a version tweaked to use EVFILT_PROC for postmaster death
detection instead of the pipe, as Tom Lane suggested in another


Ran benchmarks on unaltered 96rc1 again just to be safe. Those are first.
Decided to throw a 32 process test in there as well to see if there's
anything going on between 4 and 64

Thanks!  A summary:


The variation in the patched 64 client numbers is quite large, ranging
from ~66.5k to ~79.5k.  The highest number matched the unpatched
numbers which ranged 77.9k to 80k.  I wonder if that is noise and we
need to run longer (in which case the best outcome might be 'this
patch is neutral on FreeBSD'), or if something the patch does is doing
is causing that (for example maybe EVFILT_PROC proc filters causes
contention on the process table lock).


It's difficult to draw any conclusions at this point.

I'm currently setting up a new FreeBSD machine. Its a FreeBSD 11 with ZFS, 64 GB RAM and Quad Core. If you're interested in i can give you access for more tests this week. Maybe this will help to draw any conclusion.


Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to